-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
How is it that Zelda maintained its status while Final Fantasy couldnt?
- Thread starter LakeOf9
- Start date
lostinblue
Banned
Yeah. Wii U was between better than PS3 in normal circumstances and worse than X360 in games of that era (to X360 credit, basically tailor made to the X360 reality). It had the crazy feat of being both better and worse than X360: way more efficient architecture, technically a bit less horsepower.
It still managed to pull quite a few 1080p first party games that were doing a generational leap in rendering tech. Deferred rendering being doable without a hit as big was a generational leap in itself.
My point though was that, from the moment you're not porting and instead developing natively for it, porting to PS360 or expecting the same feature set is not something you should do. Hence, BotW IMO is closer to a PS4 game when it comes to the tech it actually relies on and the gaming experience it delivers. But that's subjective (and imo one of the only games to do that), I can agree to disagree.
I don't disagree Switch is basically PS360 pro when it comes to what it delivers, this said, I also think all the incredible stuff they pulled on PS3 and X360 are fruit of an era. No one is going to spend as much time and money as they did in ~2008 to make a sub 500 GFlop machine pull all the crazy shit they did on those consoles. This is true for every console generation, tbh. Give the horsepower of a PS2 to a modern dev and you won't see the same results (part of what fucked up Wii third party graphics results too, as well as Wii U's).
So Final Fantasy is like Sonic.
While Zelda is like Mario.
Last edited:
rickybooby87
Member
I’d say sticking to a familiar formula, with small iterations of gameplay mechanics has kept TLOZ riding pretty high in recent times.
But, I’d like to see them take more risks creatively. But, that’s highly subjective and will very wildly from person to person.
FF swings from one extreme to the next it seems in some of their mainline entries. I’m semi interested in FF16, but my favorite entries are 5,6,7,8,9.
I also loved FF7R as FF7 is my GOAT. Mostly, because it was my first foray into the JRPG world, I was only 9, so it’s stuck with me.
But, I’d like to see them take more risks creatively. But, that’s highly subjective and will very wildly from person to person.
FF swings from one extreme to the next it seems in some of their mainline entries. I’m semi interested in FF16, but my favorite entries are 5,6,7,8,9.
I also loved FF7R as FF7 is my GOAT. Mostly, because it was my first foray into the JRPG world, I was only 9, so it’s stuck with me.
Robb
Gold Member
Was also cited as inspiration for the visuals of Ghost of Tsushima.
Not to mention obvious ones like Genshin Impact or Oceanhorn.
I’m sure there’s loads more.
Especially those.
Last edited:
justiceiro
Marlboro: Other M
The franchise that had more releases got saturated faster, what is the mistery?
Fuz
Banned
Genshin, for example.
Which games were actually influenced by BotW?
darrylgorn
Member
Was also cited as inspiration for the visuals of Ghost of Tsushima.
Not to mention obvious ones like Genshin Impact or Oceanhorn.
I’m sure there’s loads more.
Especially those.
I mean, you're making the case for how little influence it actually has here as these are mostly aesthetic similiarities.
The only real influence the game brought was wall climbing.
And yeah, the games that it has directly influenced (Genshin and Fenyx) aren't very good.
Last edited:
Nautilus
Banned
Because after FF X, Square never stuck with a phylosophy on what FF should be, and kept chasing trends around. That caused the franchise to have to earn back any fan or goodwill that might have gained with the previous game, as they lost it almost completely whenever they decide to do an 180 and chase another trend.
Zelda modernized itself, but never abandoned that core ideal.
Just look up at the thread "Final Fantasy is going through a midlife identity crisis" that I made recently to understand why this is happening.
Zelda modernized itself, but never abandoned that core ideal.
Just look up at the thread "Final Fantasy is going through a midlife identity crisis" that I made recently to understand why this is happening.
Spaceman292
Banned
BOTW was very fresh. It took them ages to change things up, and then when they did it rocked.
Synless
Member
Wrong, FF 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 are all very good games.
Zelda is just more consistent.
Last edited:
killatopak
Gold Member
Final Fantasy keeps making risks it’s that simple. The greatest risk Zelda did was the Wii motion controls.
Nautilus
Banned
This. It's so easy to understand why going from turn based RPG, to action based RPG, to Full action with seemingly little RPG might turn people off, as they are standing on the dust, wondering wtf happened to the IP they once loved.
Robb
Gold Member
I’m sure you can find lots more by just googling.
FF is on a low for so long, since 9 I didn't had a awesome good game, 12 was good, 13 pure trash the sequences of 13 a little better, 15 I can't save anything from there, Its sad because is not from a hater but I like FF in general and I will try every release, big hopes for 16.
But on Zelda I cannot say the same, every release is good to awesome and in a long time a Zelda down still much better than FF.
But on Zelda I cannot say the same, every release is good to awesome and in a long time a Zelda down still much better than FF.
Azelover
Titanic was called the Ship of Dreams, and it was. It really was.
Exactly what I think too. Once Sakaguchi left and Square merged with Enix, the soul was taken out of FF. It became just a business. Reminds me of when Warner bought Atari way back.
Doom85
Member
RoboFu
One of the green rats
What kind of stupid uniformed post is this?! Zelda has reinvented itself multiple times.
We got
top down Zeldas,
side scrolling with an over world,
3D oot adventure,
Ground hog day Zelda,
Motion waggle Zelda,
1:1 motion bird riding waggle Zelda,
Full physics Zelda.
Zelda has greatly influenced the industry over its life time. Many devs cite Zelda as a influence for creating other genres / series. Like the creator of dragon quest and most recently GOW ragnarok is a direct rip off of the OOT formula/ gameplay.
FF was greatly influential as well… up until about 9/10 then it just couldn’t keep it’s self together … even with all those belt buckles.
Last edited:
Doom85
Member
Zelda is not an RPG, nor has it always been open world.
And how is IX to X the big change? The sphere grid wasn’t that much different from traditional leveling, and being able to switch in characters in battle isn’t that massive a change. If anything, VIII would a bigger departure for having the enemies scale with you and the Junction system being the insanity that it was. Then XII went for a more MMO style, XIII went back to regular turn based but also streamlined it a lot, and XV went full action.
IX to X has probably the least amount of difference between two back to back titles since VII released.
Shut0wen
Member
Personally i think it comes down to gameplay, nintendo hasnt changed the formula since BOTW and even then it still feels like a zelda game through and through while square have tried to change the formula since ff13 and have been incredibly inconsistent, if ff16 is a good entry then they should stick to its gameplay, personally i think square should just go back to turn based
killatopak
Gold Member
That’s not risk.What kind of stupid uniformed post is this?! Zelda has reinvented itself multiple times.
We got
top down Zeldas,
side scrolling with an over world,
3D oot adventure,
Ground hog day Zelda,
Motion waggle Zelda,
1:1 motion bird riding waggle Zelda,
Full physics Zelda.
Zelda has greatly influenced the industry over its life time. Many devs cite Zelda as a influence for creating other genres / series. Like the creator of dragon quest and most recently GOW ragnarok is a direct rip off of the OOT formula/ gameplay.
FF was greatly influential as well… up until about 9/10 then it just couldn’t keep it’s self together … even with all those belt buckles.
Honey Bunny
Member
Skyward to BOTW was a bigger risk than anything FF has done since switching to Playstation
simpatico
Member
Zelda is not an RPG,: Sure it is. Your abilities grow during every Zelda game. It's one of the most seamless RPG systems ever created because it has no reliance on numerical points. When the game starts you're a useless guppy and by the end you are an action hero. Not just combat, but also traversal
Zelda is not an RPG, nor has it always been open world.
And how is IX to X the big change? The sphere grid wasn’t that much different from traditional leveling, and being able to switch in characters in battle isn’t that massive a change. If anything, VIII would a bigger departure for having the enemies scale with you and the Junction system being the insanity that it was. Then XII went for a more MMO style, XIII went back to regular turn based but also streamlined it a lot, and XV went full action.
IX to X has probably the least amount of difference between two back to back titles since VII released.
nor has it always been open world.: I'm struggling to think of a mainline Zelda game where you cannot traverse the entire world at the end of the game. Sure they're not huge barren wastelands, but I don't think having huge barren wastelands is the true definition of Open World. Yakuza is open world.
nor has it always been open world.: FFX is linear. You're making your way down a hallway with window dressing. ATB combat is gone. The numerical skill point RPG system is exchanged for a weird sphere grid. It disposes of almost everything that made a Final Fantasy what is was for the first 9 installments. It was streamlined to a fault.
killatopak
Gold Member
The artful mincer
Member
Do you mean by sales because sales wise zelda was completely uneven until breath of the wild
https://images.app.goo.gl/5j5Xi3vNVQ1j3fmU6
It's doubled as well since then.
Maybe ff16 will be final fantasy breath of the wild moment.
People wonder why Sony released horizon near zelda but they had nothing to worry about based on past performance
https://images.app.goo.gl/5j5Xi3vNVQ1j3fmU6
It's doubled as well since then.
Maybe ff16 will be final fantasy breath of the wild moment.
People wonder why Sony released horizon near zelda but they had nothing to worry about based on past performance
Imru’ al-Qays
Member
FFXIII and XV were objectively terrible games and VIIR, instead of being a straight remake of the sort that other companies are having so much success with, was a bowdlerization of one of the best stories in the medium with a bunch of alternate timelines hoo-ha that no normal person gives a shit about or finds interesting.
As to why this happened: Square forced out both Sakaguchi and his chosen protégé Matsuno, whereas Nintendo obviously had the good sense to retain Miyamoto and Aonuma
As to why this happened: Square forced out both Sakaguchi and his chosen protégé Matsuno, whereas Nintendo obviously had the good sense to retain Miyamoto and Aonuma
Werewolf Jones
Gold Member
Aonuma and Miyamoto stayed with Zelda, Sakaguchi didn't.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
Zelda is consistently far better. And I'm a big FF fan. Zelda has never approached a misfire as big as XV or XIV 1.0. Even the ones I liked come with some caveats. I like XIII a lot but it does have some issues. And most of the areas FF excels in are stylistic or artistic. Zelda excels in pure game design, shaping 3d spaces and interactive items and puzzles and having it be so polished that people can play it without issue. Its in an entirely different and superior league compared to FF.
MagiusNecros
Gilgamesh Fan Annoyance
It's because unlike Square Enix Nintendo retained it's core talent that is responsible for developing the Zelda games while the old talent split off from Square Enix years ago and now Final Fantasy prioritizes graphics and reinventing the wheel just for the sake of it.
I'd also say Zelda has a soul and Final Fantasy no longer does. Zelda for me still has that "magic" that makes me smile. The same kind of magic that Dragon Quest still seems to possess.
And right now for Final Fantasy there hasn't been a decent mainline entry since 12. Especially with how bad overall 15 was. XI is the superior MMO and XIV can't even come close to the world building of Vanadiel.
Best FF game I feel they've put out recently ironically is Stranger of Paradise. Similar to X-2 the game is just FUN.
I'd much rather FF as a whole have it's own identity and provide an experience nothing else can but I'm seeing a lot of it's games just chasing trends that are popular.
I'd also say Zelda has a soul and Final Fantasy no longer does. Zelda for me still has that "magic" that makes me smile. The same kind of magic that Dragon Quest still seems to possess.
And right now for Final Fantasy there hasn't been a decent mainline entry since 12. Especially with how bad overall 15 was. XI is the superior MMO and XIV can't even come close to the world building of Vanadiel.
Best FF game I feel they've put out recently ironically is Stranger of Paradise. Similar to X-2 the game is just FUN.
I'd much rather FF as a whole have it's own identity and provide an experience nothing else can but I'm seeing a lot of it's games just chasing trends that are popular.
NeoIkaruGAF
Gold Member
A somewhat snarky, but very correct, answer is that Zelda kept using the best anime tropes and didn’t rely too heavily on anime style, whereas FF embraced the worst anime tropes and went totally wild with the style.
Another reason is that the success of FF in the late 90s opened the floodgates to a deluge of JRPGs and FF lost its uniqueness, with people discovering arguably better games in the genre. The series lost a lot of credibility with X-2, and X was already a step back in gaming quality compared to some late PS1 JRPGs. Then XI broke the single-player tradition, leaving many fans without a main entry until XII, which came too late in the PS2’s life cycle and wasn’t appreciated by many. Then came XIII, going completely against expectations and tainting the series’s reputation for years.
Meanwhile Zelda maintained high quality and Nintendo didn’t dilute the brand with a dozen spin-offs and MMORPGs.
Another reason is that the success of FF in the late 90s opened the floodgates to a deluge of JRPGs and FF lost its uniqueness, with people discovering arguably better games in the genre. The series lost a lot of credibility with X-2, and X was already a step back in gaming quality compared to some late PS1 JRPGs. Then XI broke the single-player tradition, leaving many fans without a main entry until XII, which came too late in the PS2’s life cycle and wasn’t appreciated by many. Then came XIII, going completely against expectations and tainting the series’s reputation for years.
Meanwhile Zelda maintained high quality and Nintendo didn’t dilute the brand with a dozen spin-offs and MMORPGs.
apple_of_enlightenment
Member
Hiroshi Yamauchi said that Final Fantasy is for loser kids hiding in their basements.
Zelda has international themes (European, medieval environments, etc.) and more user friendly game mechanics than Japan-centric anime turn-based Final Fantasy.
Final Fantasy has been consistently more popular than Zelda in Japan -- but that might not be true for this generation since PS5 has bombed there and botw seems to resonate everywhere.
Zelda has international themes (European, medieval environments, etc.) and more user friendly game mechanics than Japan-centric anime turn-based Final Fantasy.
Final Fantasy has been consistently more popular than Zelda in Japan -- but that might not be true for this generation since PS5 has bombed there and botw seems to resonate everywhere.
Krappadizzle
Gold Member
Zelda games have heart. Final Fantasy has Spirits Within.
Last edited:
Portugeezer
Member
I feel like Zelda was always bigger, but I don't know.
There was an era in which peplle didn't want turn based battle systems. FF franchise remained a big name, but definitely lost some of its appeal. Strangely, I think people appreciate turn based a bit more these days than in the past, but it's irrelevant as FF now has realtime combat.
Zelda has always been more gameplay orientated.
There was an era in which peplle didn't want turn based battle systems. FF franchise remained a big name, but definitely lost some of its appeal. Strangely, I think people appreciate turn based a bit more these days than in the past, but it's irrelevant as FF now has realtime combat.
Zelda has always been more gameplay orientated.
Last edited:
Captain Toad
Banned
Except XI, XII, XIV (and each expansion which all felt like a full-fledged FF game on their own), VII Remake. And, I still think XIII is underrated.
ProgenitorCastle
Banned
Cuz Nintendo
Imru’ al-Qays
Member
The movie didn't kill Squaresoft, the movie gave Yoichi Wada the pretext he needed to kill Squaresoft.
Paulistano
Member
Don't forget the stamina bar.*cough* weapon durability *cough*
Fuz
Banned
No.
lyan
Member
You forgot all those posts on fans ranting about how they want proper dungeons and how Link's sword shouldn't break every 3 seconds, that BotW isn't a Zelda.
Astral Dog
Member
Zelda was on a path to decline until Breath of the Wild, not critically but in terms of sales and brand awareness
Final Fantasy had an entire generation of divisive games like FFXIII, and then FFXV wich was once again divisive(but still mostly good )
Narrative and combat(or even RPG mechanics) is not a big part of Zelda,but its for Final Fantasy.
Final Fantasy is on the way to recover.
As for why Legend of Zelda has remained consistent ? the formula works wonders, and Nintendo never moved away from that,other than experimenting with the art direction,instead focusing on polishing what works,Skyward Sword was the most divisive among the fans,but still overall a solid game with interesting mechanics, strong bosses and dungeons
Then they listened, and released A Link Between Worlds and Breath of the Wild,to focus on exploration
Final Fantasy had an entire generation of divisive games like FFXIII, and then FFXV wich was once again divisive(but still mostly good )
Narrative and combat(or even RPG mechanics) is not a big part of Zelda,but its for Final Fantasy.
Final Fantasy is on the way to recover.
As for why Legend of Zelda has remained consistent ? the formula works wonders, and Nintendo never moved away from that,other than experimenting with the art direction,instead focusing on polishing what works,Skyward Sword was the most divisive among the fans,but still overall a solid game with interesting mechanics, strong bosses and dungeons
Then they listened, and released A Link Between Worlds and Breath of the Wild,to focus on exploration
Last edited:
Doom85
Member
Ah yes, the head of Nintendo during the N64 era, lord knows he has no reason to be salty towards the FF series and is being completely unbiased here.
-Zelda is not a RPG. It is an action/adventure series. Merely powering up the character in any way does not automatically constitute a RPG. Or are the Metroid games now a RPG series? Devil May Cry? Resident Evil 4?
-so basically you admit you’re making up your own definitions. You can call a chocolate cake a “watermelon” all you want, just don’t be surprised when not a single person plays along
-bruh, now you can’t even keep what I said straight. I said Zelda wasn’t always open world, not FF. X being ”linear” is irrelevant to what I said. The sphere grid still gave stat bonuses and skill unlocks like prior games would do with EXP and equipment and such. Meanwhile VIII did all the crazy shit I brought up, XII abandoned turn based altogether, XIII brought it back but eliminated towns, lowered equipment variety, and was truly linear barring near the end, and XV was 100% action.
If you’re so predisposed to hating on FF X to the point you can’t tell the obvious fact that gameplay wise it was not THAT different from IX compared to how much VIII differed from VII (maybe you live in an alternate reality where VII had enemy scaling, timed attacks, and the fucking Junction system), XII differed from X (didn’t realize X played like a MMO and had a gambit system…), XIII differed from XII (I guess XII had no towns and was a linear hallway in your eyes), and XV differed from XIII (man, remember when XIII was a big open world with 100% action gameplay? Crazy times), and so on and so forth, then my god, man, my god.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Nonsense. FF is way more variable in terms of switching styles and approaches than Zelda. We're talking about a franchise with 2 successful MMORPG's baked in as part of its numerical mainline releases for a start!
Elysion
Banned
I would argue that for a long time, starting with the release of FF7 in 1997, and up until the release of BotW in 2017, FF was the bigger franchise than Zelda. I always found it interesting how people used to lump Zelda and Mario together as these killer-app franchises that people buy Nintendo hardware for, when in truth pre-BotW Zelda wasn’t anywhere near as big as Mario.
Skyward Sword on Wii sold less than 4 million copies, which is significantly less than even the worst mainline FF game since FF7 (which is FF9). Wind Waker on Gamecube didn’t do much better. Twilight Princess sold better, but still not as much as FF7. Even the legendary OoT sold less than FF7 (and also less than FF8, FF10 and FF15 for that matter). There were a ton of franchises during that period that sold better than OoT (or any other Zelda game pre-BotW), franchises that most people would never put anywhere near Zelda in terms of (perceived) prestige. Zelda just never was this gigantic franchise that people made it out to be, it was only with BotW that it became one, and overtook FF.
Skyward Sword on Wii sold less than 4 million copies, which is significantly less than even the worst mainline FF game since FF7 (which is FF9). Wind Waker on Gamecube didn’t do much better. Twilight Princess sold better, but still not as much as FF7. Even the legendary OoT sold less than FF7 (and also less than FF8, FF10 and FF15 for that matter). There were a ton of franchises during that period that sold better than OoT (or any other Zelda game pre-BotW), franchises that most people would never put anywhere near Zelda in terms of (perceived) prestige. Zelda just never was this gigantic franchise that people made it out to be, it was only with BotW that it became one, and overtook FF.
Last edited:
Whoof I can't wait for this reduction of XII to die. XII wasn't an "MMO style. . ." it was literally them experimenting with real time combat in an active time battle system.
. . .like people see "aggro lines" and automatically think "MMO."
Skelterz
Member
Because Zelda maintained it’s integrity throughout its various iterations never straying to far away from what made it popular in the first place while taking small risks with certain mechanics, Final fantasy was all too happy to complete disregard it’s identity as if it were shackles from a bygone era and in doing so now make games that don’t even resemble final fantasy.
Let’s be honest if there weren’t moogles chocobos and Eikons in FF16 would you recognise it as an FF?
Let’s be honest if there weren’t moogles chocobos and Eikons in FF16 would you recognise it as an FF?
Skelterz
Member
I disagree Zelda has always been one of the premier IP it’s OOT is often regarded as one of the best games ever made if not the best, the series pioneered so many things players take for granted now in 3D video games.
Final fantasy albeit huge has really lost its way.
Doom85
Member
Bruh, I was already having to write a ton there, sorry I didn’t get into the nuances. The more important element of the argument was that it was a bigger departure from X’s combat than X’s combat was from IX’s.
Honey Bunny
Member
They were developing XI alongside X, so much less of a risk than BOTW. It's not nonsense.
AngelMuffin
Member
The Zelda formula has generally stayed the same, BoTW notwithstanding, whereas FF has been all over the place the last 20 years. Even though I’m a big fan of both franchises, haven’t truly loved a FF game since IX (although FFVIIR) has gone a long way in binging me back on board and I’m now excited for both XVI and ToTK.